Central Area Neighborhood Development Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201794339
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123536768
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,008,082
Expenses
$1,028,461
Assets
$213,557
Liabilities
$16,287

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mickella Rolfes (Executive Director)
  • Lane Brown (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mickella Rolfes (Executive Director): $79,697 total reported compensation
  • Lane Brown (Executive Director): $71,669 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Central Area Neighborhood Development Organization works to support and strengthen the Central neighborhood in the areas of community building, economic development and housing though engaged and informd actions, fostering a neighborhood where everyone can thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2023 CANDO strengthened cross-neighborhood partnerships, investing time and energy into the South Minneapolis Antiracism Coalition (SMAC) to create a new culture of collaboration and organizing in the spirit of undoing racism. CANDOs flagship program Plant-Grow-Share completed its 9th season, hosting 25 participants that built raised garden beds, attended classes, shared produce with the community and cooked meals together over the fire. 2023 also saw the closing Hosmer Community Garden to accommodate new development in the neighborhood and reinitialized urban agriculture outreach out of Bryant Community Garden - moving soil, plants and people along the way. Partnering with Phelps Park, Plant-Grow-Share hosted its annual harvest festival in the fall, celebrating a successful season with the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 68% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.3%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.3% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $799K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.